|← Impact of the European Settlement on the Indigenous People of Australia||Understanding and Speaking →|
We are in the era of globalization, where the stance on anything ultimately leaves an impact over the other thing as well. God has created us a human being, and as a human being we have a number of things which we have to comply, by hook or by crook. The best thing which the God has awarded to us is the mentality, intelligence and the power to speak and understand.
The entire world has been moving with a robust speed and literally due to the immense technology, we can get everything in just a matter of time. Well, the main prospective of this study is to pen down cruel behavioral stance of the mankind towards the animals. It is a term paper which has been made with immense study and research. Let me tell in brief tat what we are going to do in this research paper. We have selected the books of three writers, which are ‘John Coetzee, Thomas Nagel’and David Forster Wallace on which our entire analysis will be based on. We have made three sections in this small report, in the first section we will elaborate our reader regarding the three books of above mentioned three writers just to give them a general idea over their works, and then we will shift our gears towards the main theme of this paper, which is to highlight the issues pertains to the animals' violence for the sake of us. In the 2nd section, we will first describe the basic differentiation between a human being and an animal which will guide us to accomplish our said task in a plausible manner. In the third's section we have included a strong conclusion to support our understanding pertinently. Let’s start our first section.
The first book which we have chosen to give a thorough review to the readers is Live of Animals by J.M Coetzee. The life of Animal was a series of Elizabeth Costello, which is a 2003 novel by Coetzee. In this novel, Elizabeth Costello, an aging Australian writer, travels around the world and gives lectures on topics including the lives of animals and literary censorship. In that book, the writer has identified the rights of animals. Elizabeth Costello can no longer look at another person in the eye: humans, especially meat-eating ones, seem to her to be conspirators in a crime of stupefying magnitude taking place on farms and in slaughterhouses, factories, and laboratories across the world. In the book “The live of Animal”, the writer J. M. Coetzee uses fiction to present a strongly moving conversation of animal rights in all their involvedness. He draws us into Elizabeth Costello's own sense of mortality, her compassion for animals, and her alienation from humans, even from her own family. The book was one of the famous for its time and has been rewarded with a number of rewards due to its importance and the issues it had highlighted. The second book which we have chosen is of “David Foster Wallace” which is “Consider a Lobster” (Frans, De, Waal, 1997).
If we contemplate on the book by giving it a prudent study then we will find that both the works are quite similar to each other as far as the main issue identification is concerned, as the work confronted the same idea of human violation over the animals.
David Foster Wallace was an American author of novels, essays, and short stories, and a professor at PomonaCollege in Claremont, California. He was widely known for his 1996 novel Infinite Jest. The secret pleasure of reading David Foster Wallace is still, for a fortunate minority, just possible in Britain. But only just. His early fiction The Broom of the System and Girl With Curious Hair - is not easy to find on the shelves That novel, published in 1996, wowed US critics and zapped the mind of a campus generation Consider the Lobster offers an exhilarating short-cut to the mind of a writer for whom auto castration is a good reason to investigate 'adult entertainment', who swears once a year not to get angry and self-righteous about the misuse of the possessive apostrophe, or the serial comma, and who is happy to devote 3,000 words to Kafka's 'sense of humor'.
He had declared a number of things, which is literally unethical and illegal as well. In the book, he had discussed several times that for the sake of ourselves, we killed the animals which are one of the major part of cruelty. The last but not the least book, which we have chosen is “What is like to be a bat”? By Thomas Nagel. In this book, he compared the life of a person with a bat. He declared that what sort of problems and other things we will envisage if our life becomes like a bat.
Nagel's what is it like to be a bat? Is a standard work, centered approximately the human awareness? The work was published in 1974, which was about the time that physicalist arguments, which would decrease the mental to the just physical, were becoming a frightening front in the investigation of consciousness.
Perhaps the most indispensable point he makes within the work is that comments on an experience are by nature always prejudiced. The whole idea of a purpose account, therefore, makes no sense no more sense than asking what someone's innermost experiences are really like, as opposite to how they seem to that person.
Nagel seeks to prove that the complete nature of the idea is so difficult to comprehend that to even capture the attention of an addressee, he must make them think about the subject by asking them a "trick question". "What is it like to be a bat?" is designed to make the reader think about what they suppose or imagine it "would be like" to be a bat, while at the same time making them (hopefully) think about that they cannot ever actually know. If he could explain this theory straightforwardly, he would be making a disagreement of the theory itself..
Now, we are all set to move towards the second section of this report.
In this section, we will answer four questions; the first question is about the differentiation between a human being and an animal. Let me describe the same in a good manner.
Animals and humans live in many different worlds that rarely partly cover. Each animal creates its province and lives contained by this country on its own, inside its own community. On the contrary, humans move from one cycle (one community) to another. He can progress this year from Japan to Los Angeles, or he may become the salesman after abandoning his former profession of a dancer. The animal world is tremendously abridged evaluated to the one of the humans (Guerrini, A, 2003). Animals rarely nuisance each other and continue basically the same life from birth to death. At the same time, animals and humans understand little of each other, or at least this is what we presume, but humans have been academic to use animals, not the contrary. Humans understand things animals cannot understand, and animals perceive things humans cannot perceive. The dog’s nose is a million times more sensitive than ours. Dogs can hear sounds that humans cannot be hear, and from a great distance too. It is interesting to notice that if the animal senses are more developed, their sense of space is usually much more controlled. A field, for instance, would appear like a big forest for an ant. Ants recognize the obstacles and its height by the vibration on its antennae. So touching is very important for them, as well as for the housefly that tastes from its feet. Humans rely a lot on their eyesight. However, again, if humans would like to see like a hawk, they would have to look through binoculars that magnifies eight times what they see!
In the second question, we have to compare and analyzed the rationality and consciousness of the animals with the human beings. The exact question, which we will answer in a moment, is mentioned below,
Is the fact that we consider animals as not endowed with rationality, consciousness or a soul what allows us to consider them not on an equal footing with ourselves?
I must say that our mentality to consider this stance that there is no rationality, consciousness or soul in animals is totally wrong. J. M. Coetzee, and David Foster in their books clearly declared that when we slaughter an animal for our nourishment. Both the writers are with the fact that animals also have soul and the element of consciousness, so they feel the pain like the human beings do. Nowadays, the slaughtering machines are also available in which sharp and dangerous blades are equipped, which slaughters the animals especially cows and goats instantly with a single stab. If we consider the fictional character of Elisabeth Costello of Lives of Animals, then we will find that the stance of doing cruel on the innocent animals is quite heart throbbing. Elisabeth Costello in the book was very kind towards the animals and his son, who was a physician, was also like the affection stance of his mom towards the animals. According to Elisabeth, animals are innocent, which cannot speak, but they can hurt with pain. I want to add a quote which is exactly related to this sheer dilemma.